'Why I decided not to take my allowance rise' by Wiltshire Council leader Jane Scott

Wiltshire Council leader Jane Scott said she decided to forgo any increase in allowances during the Christmas break as a campaign against the rise had become so personal.

A Freedom of Information request by the Gazette & Herald revealed her surprise decision.

She said: “It had all become very personal to me and I thought the only way to stop the campaign was to decide not to take it.

“All the talk about the allowances was having a detrimental affect on the work of the council and that is my main priority. All anyone wanted to talk about was allowances and it was overshadowing all the positive work that is being done.”

She said she had received the extra payments up until December but she would be paying them back.

Coun Scott would have been eligible to receive total allowances of more than £52,227 instead of the £37,335 she received before the council vote to increase allowances was made in November.

But the FOI request confirmed Council Scott and Coun Stewart Dobson from Marlborough had refused the increase and Coun Laura Mayes from Devizes had refused half of her increase in allowance.

Coun Scott would have been entitled to £12,289 for being a councillor, £30,772 for being council leader and £9,216 for being chairman of the health and well being board.

The increase had been backdated to last year’s May elections.

Before the vote Coun Scott received £25,168 for being council leader and £12,167 for being a councillor. The basic councillor’s allowance went up by one per cent – a rise of £122 while those councillors who are members of the cabinet saw allowances increase by at least 22 per cent from £15,101 to £18,433 a year.

Related links

Coun Scott said she had also turned down the £9,216 for being the chairman of the health and well being board but she was pleased that the responsibilities that went with this role had been recognised with the allowance.

She said: I will only take the same allowance as I had before the decision was taken on the increase. I will not take the allowance for the health and wellbeing board. I am happy to do this job for free as I have done for the past two years but it is a big job and if someone else takes it on in the future they should receive a proper allowance for doing it.”

She also said that allowances were a personal decision for each councillor and just because she had decided not to take the rise she did not expect others to follow suit.

She said she did not think she would change her mind in the future about taking the rise.

She said she had chosen not to make her decision public as she did not want to make it political and was only speaking now as the FOI had revealed the information.

Only last week Coun Scott defended her decision to take the rise in allowances after she was criticised by Eric Pickles during a visit to Wiltshire. She said at the time: “I will be taking the allowance, as will other councillors.”

A motion calling for the allowance increase to be overturned will be debated at a full council meeting at County Hall, Trowbridge at 10.30am on Tuesday.

Comments (26)

Well at last some sanity, however this is not the end. Scott and her corrupt cabal should be made to demonstrate how they have provided 'value for money', the yardstick they use for public services that they are so fond of contracting out. Show us the improvements,because the people of Wiltshire do not see an improvement in the roads, litter picking, or any other service they have dogmatically contracted out.
As for the deputy leader criticising Network Rail, which political party told us that privatisation of the rail network would provide improved, cheaper rail travel.
The chaos caused by privatisation now sucks more money from the public purse (even allowing for inflation) than British Rail ever received. Oh and one of the biggest beneficiaries a certain Richard Branson has never made a penny of profit it all comes from our subsidies.

Well at last some sanity, however this is not the end. Scott and her corrupt cabal should be made to demonstrate how they have provided 'value for money', the yardstick they use for public services that they are so fond of contracting out. Show us the improvements,because the people of Wiltshire do not see an improvement in the roads, litter picking, or any other service they have dogmatically contracted out.
As for the deputy leader criticising Network Rail, which political party told us that privatisation of the rail network would provide improved, cheaper rail travel.
The chaos caused by privatisation now sucks more money from the public purse (even allowing for inflation) than British Rail ever received. Oh and one of the biggest beneficiaries a certain Richard Branson has never made a penny of profit it all comes from our subsidies.kimcrawley

It is astounding how Ms Scott can turn around being Democratically Challenged into "it had all become personal to me" ??....

Ms Scott should be reminded that :

ANYONE has a Right to challenge ANY decisions that she and her Conservative Cabinet make..
Her Decisions have ALREADY had a "detrimental affect" BIG TIME on those who live in Wiltshire, and especially those who used to work for W/C and...those who continue to work there in FEAR of loosing their jobs.....

If the "work of the council" HAS suffered, it might well be that at LAST, people are no longer prepared to sit back and watch our County be Politically pillaged ?......

If Ms Scott's "main priority is the council", then WHY has she gone on and on putting her Political Party and herself BEFORE the People of Wiltshire ?

Ms Scott, YOU 'talked about the allowances" and YOU Voted to give yourself a pay rise.....

If there is any "overshadowing all the positive work that is being done", then the Fact is that, YOU caused this situation by taking a pay rise that you could ALWAYS have declined......

As for the "health and well being board" that YOU have chosen to attach yourself to.....what can I say other than, you have ALREADY refused Residents of Wiltshire their Right to help BECAUSE , you HAVE spent out on "other things".....

It is odd that you have said you "had chosen not to make your decision public as you did not want to make it political" ??

The question now is, has Ms Scott "turned" or has guilty conscience now finally crept in ??....

Please everyone STILL come to the Meeting at County Hall on Tuesday 4th February at 10.30 am ?

Jane Scott "giving back her pay rise", is NOT going to sort out all the OTHER mess that this County is in through no choice or fault of the People.....

We are ALL reading what you have told the Press !!??....

With respect, Ms Scott, had you have NOT made a Political Career at the expense of the people of Wiltshire and the REAL Staff at W/c, NONE of us would be "talking about it"....

Well said kimcrawley....
It is astounding how Ms Scott can turn around being Democratically Challenged into "it had all become personal to me" ??....
Ms Scott should be reminded that :
ANYONE has a Right to challenge ANY decisions that she and her Conservative Cabinet make..
Her Decisions have ALREADY had a "detrimental affect" BIG TIME on those who live in Wiltshire, and especially those who used to work for W/C and...those who continue to work there in FEAR of loosing their jobs.....
If the "work of the council" HAS suffered, it might well be that at LAST, people are no longer prepared to sit back and watch our County be Politically pillaged ?......
If Ms Scott's "main priority is the council", then WHY has she gone on and on putting her Political Party and herself BEFORE the People of Wiltshire ?
Ms Scott, YOU 'talked about the allowances" and YOU Voted to give yourself a pay rise.....
If there is any "overshadowing all the positive work that is being done", then the Fact is that, YOU caused this situation by taking a pay rise that you could ALWAYS have declined......
As for the "health and well being board" that YOU have chosen to attach yourself to.....what can I say other than, you have ALREADY refused Residents of Wiltshire their Right to help BECAUSE , you HAVE spent out on "other things".....
It is odd that you have said you "had chosen not to make your decision public as you did not want to make it political" ??
The question now is, has Ms Scott "turned" or has guilty conscience now finally crept in ??....
Please everyone STILL come to the Meeting at County Hall on Tuesday 4th February at 10.30 am ?
Jane Scott "giving back her pay rise", is NOT going to sort out all the OTHER mess that this County is in through no choice or fault of the People.....
We are ALL reading what you have told the Press !!??....
With respect, Ms Scott, had you have NOT made a Political Career at the expense of the people of Wiltshire and the REAL Staff at W/c, NONE of us would be "talking about it"....brasstacks

Councillor Scott should never have been so brazen as to accept the increased allowances in the first place. It takes something pretty bad politically to have Wiltshire Council portrayed as a "Rotten Borough" in Private Eye and that epithet was, regrettably, completely deserved. There was also something rotten about the decision of her party (with some notable exceptions such as Graham Payne and John Knight who, as always, have their finger completely on the pulse as to what their constituents want) deliberately to obstruct the Cineworld development and give an unfair advantage to Legal & General/Odeon. The fact that the inspector has upheld their appeal and we will now have two cinemas in what must be the shortest reporting back time for any appeal hearing is an indictment of Scott and De Rhe Philipe's stance as well as some of the council officers. Mind you officers will have been under orders from their political masters to obstruct even if they were personally in favour of the Cineworld development. It strikes me that both these councillors should resign and let's have the likes of Graham and John in their place so that we have people in place who really do care about Trowbridge and its future. It will be interesting what Legal and General now do with the St Stephen's site - it wouldn't surprise me if they now tried to sell it on. The car parking problems will come back to haunt them (they can't say thay were not warned time and time again) and the only answer is using the Peter Black site as an interim solution until the Cineworld site is completed in 2015. I certainly wanted to see thriving sites at both locations and will support the Odeon and Cineworls. No one can deny that the St Stephens was an absolute eyesore but that was no reason to deny Prorsus their application going forward at the same timeas that of L&G. They, De Rhe Philipe and Scott have a lot to answer for in relation to this sorry saga and thank goodness that the inspector saw through the charade of objections they created.

Councillor Scott should never have been so brazen as to accept the increased allowances in the first place. It takes something pretty bad politically to have Wiltshire Council portrayed as a "Rotten Borough" in Private Eye and that epithet was, regrettably, completely deserved. There was also something rotten about the decision of her party (with some notable exceptions such as Graham Payne and John Knight who, as always, have their finger completely on the pulse as to what their constituents want) deliberately to obstruct the Cineworld development and give an unfair advantage to Legal & General/Odeon. The fact that the inspector has upheld their appeal and we will now have two cinemas in what must be the shortest reporting back time for any appeal hearing is an indictment of Scott and De Rhe Philipe's stance as well as some of the council officers. Mind you officers will have been under orders from their political masters to obstruct even if they were personally in favour of the Cineworld development. It strikes me that both these councillors should resign and let's have the likes of Graham and John in their place so that we have people in place who really do care about Trowbridge and its future. It will be interesting what Legal and General now do with the St Stephen's site - it wouldn't surprise me if they now tried to sell it on. The car parking problems will come back to haunt them (they can't say thay were not warned time and time again) and the only answer is using the Peter Black site as an interim solution until the Cineworld site is completed in 2015. I certainly wanted to see thriving sites at both locations and will support the Odeon and Cineworls. No one can deny that the St Stephens was an absolute eyesore but that was no reason to deny Prorsus their application going forward at the same timeas that of L&G. They, De Rhe Philipe and Scott have a lot to answer for in relation to this sorry saga and thank goodness that the inspector saw through the charade of objections they created.jbncer

The corruption in this county is endemic, rotten to the core. Prosperous towns in the South East have no problem with a KFC or McDonalds franchise on their high street.
What is so special about Chippenham with it's legion of empty shops?
Is it undue influence over planning process by the same group that made a complete mess of their opportunity to provide Chippenham, Calne and Melksham with a town centre fit for purpose.
All because of their own grubby little interests. now as a unified authority the impact of these incompetent thieves is magnified as the sums of money they misappropriate grows.
Where have all the honest tories gone?

The corruption in this county is endemic, rotten to the core. Prosperous towns in the South East have no problem with a KFC or McDonalds franchise on their high street.
What is so special about Chippenham with it's legion of empty shops?
Is it undue influence over planning process by the same group that made a complete mess of their opportunity to provide Chippenham, Calne and Melksham with a town centre fit for purpose.
All because of their own grubby little interests. now as a unified authority the impact of these incompetent thieves is magnified as the sums of money they misappropriate grows.
Where have all the honest tories gone?kimcrawley

Gosh what a munch of moaners!
You elect your council members and the council re-elected Ms Scott last year to maintain her post.
It was a cross party decision to increase the allowences and would have been agreed with our without Ms Scott as the indicudual at the top.
I suspect the mural at the council is down the the moaners who still work there and the bitterness of those who were unfortunatly made redundent.

For those who moan about her and what she does or doesnt do why dont you run for election? Or if you have, perhaps you were not elected because your views do not represent those who are voting.

Gosh what a munch of moaners!
You elect your council members and the council re-elected Ms Scott last year to maintain her post.
It was a cross party decision to increase the allowences and would have been agreed with our without Ms Scott as the indicudual at the top.
I suspect the mural at the council is down the the moaners who still work there and the bitterness of those who were unfortunatly made redundent.
For those who moan about her and what she does or doesnt do why dont you run for election? Or if you have, perhaps you were not elected because your views do not represent those who are voting.ML1986

exactly, it was the wiltshire public that voted this woman back in(not me as I want her out) so why are they all moaning about her. I expect halve of them dont vote or just put a tick in any box without actually seeing what the party stands for and without thinking who is getting us in this mess!

exactly, it was the wiltshire public that voted this woman back in(not me as I want her out) so why are they all moaning about her. I expect halve of them dont vote or just put a tick in any box without actually seeing what the party stands for and without thinking who is getting us in this mess!chips-in-ham

It would appear Councillor Jane Scott had accepted and been paid the increase in 'expenses ' up to an unknown date in December, but then pressure placed upon her from higher places in the Conservative party maybe FORCED her change of mind ? Maybe the timescale involved, and the fact the Gazette & Herald maybe NEEDED to make a Freedom of Information request to get an answer to their questions would indicate how willing Councillor Jane Scott REALLY was to give up these allowanaces ? Maybe we will see a better spun response from her or the Council soon ?

It would appear Councillor Jane Scott had accepted and been paid the increase in 'expenses ' up to an unknown date in December, but then pressure placed upon her from higher places in the Conservative party maybe FORCED her change of mind ? Maybe the timescale involved, and the fact the Gazette & Herald maybe NEEDED to make a Freedom of Information request to get an answer to their questions would indicate how willing Councillor Jane Scott REALLY was to give up these allowanaces ? Maybe we will see a better spun response from her or the Council soon ?underdogs

Did anyone heard her on Radio Wiltshire? She was flop flopping all over the shop. The interviewer had on the ropes.

One really wonders if she now has support from the Conservative Cabinet.

Are they going to give up their allowances?

It is all total confusion.

Did anyone heard her on Radio Wiltshire? She was flop flopping all over the shop. The interviewer had on the ropes.
One really wonders if she now has support from the Conservative Cabinet.
Are they going to give up their allowances?
It is all total confusion.brandx

ML1986 wrote:
Gosh what a munch of moaners!
You elect your council members and the council re-elected Ms Scott last year to maintain her post.
It was a cross party decision to increase the allowences and would have been agreed with our without Ms Scott as the indicudual at the top.
I suspect the mural at the council is down the the moaners who still work there and the bitterness of those who were unfortunatly made redundent.

For those who moan about her and what she does or doesnt do why dont you run for election? Or if you have, perhaps you were not elected because your views do not represent those who are voting.

At last a tory apologist breaks ranks. (ML 1986 - the champion of the corrupt)
I suspect your spelling and grammar represent an 'educated tory opinion'.
What you fail to consider is that Margaret bloody Thatcher the architect of this chaos used the narrative that union leaders were not elected by the majority of members as an excuse to crush the unions.
On behalf of 'those who were unfortunatly made redundent' sic. If it's acceptable to stop the unions carrying out their democratic mandate, then it's perfectly reasonable for us moaners to insist that this self serving, incompetent bunch of money grabbers resign IMMEDIATELY.

[quote][p][bold]ML1986[/bold] wrote:
Gosh what a munch of moaners!
You elect your council members and the council re-elected Ms Scott last year to maintain her post.
It was a cross party decision to increase the allowences and would have been agreed with our without Ms Scott as the indicudual at the top.
I suspect the mural at the council is down the the moaners who still work there and the bitterness of those who were unfortunatly made redundent.
For those who moan about her and what she does or doesnt do why dont you run for election? Or if you have, perhaps you were not elected because your views do not represent those who are voting.[/p][/quote]At last a tory apologist breaks ranks. (ML 1986 - the champion of the corrupt)
I suspect your spelling and grammar represent an 'educated tory opinion'.
What you fail to consider is that Margaret bloody Thatcher the architect of this chaos used the narrative that union leaders were not elected by the majority of members as an excuse to crush the unions.
On behalf of 'those who were unfortunatly made redundent' sic. If it's acceptable to stop the unions carrying out their democratic mandate, then it's perfectly reasonable for us moaners to insist that this self serving, incompetent bunch of money grabbers resign IMMEDIATELY.kimcrawley

chips-in-ham wrote:
exactly, it was the wiltshire public that voted this woman back in(not me as I want her out) so why are they all moaning about her. I expect halve of them dont vote or just put a tick in any box without actually seeing what the party stands for and without thinking who is getting us in this mess!

It didn't occur to you that those who are complaining about her may NOT have voted for her???? Really????

[quote][p][bold]chips-in-ham[/bold] wrote:
exactly, it was the wiltshire public that voted this woman back in(not me as I want her out) so why are they all moaning about her. I expect halve of them dont vote or just put a tick in any box without actually seeing what the party stands for and without thinking who is getting us in this mess![/p][/quote]It didn't occur to you that those who are complaining about her may NOT have voted for her???? Really????politepanda

Scott has made a U-turn because - like a lot of autocrats - she was totally out of touch with reality. Now - with an embarrassed party and egg on her face she makes a desperate U-turn.
While the majority of the public are facing another year of frozen pay - with no promise of increase, others have suffered redundancy (not least the council employees who's redundancies have funded these wonderful expense rises) - while being hammered by the increasing cost of living - the autocrat in her ivory tower thought it enough to issue a missive about how humanitarian she was being - accepting a pay rise for "those who come after her"
And STILL she claims only to be "giving back" as a measure to prevent detraction from "the good things" the council are doing. And stopping the protest is all about her beloved council - not her.
Humbug, Scott. Total humbug. It's all about the next election - retaining tenancy of your ivory tower and being able to accept that pretty little expense package during the NEXT term. I sincerely hope you're evicted.

Scott has made a U-turn because - like a lot of autocrats - she was totally out of touch with reality. Now - with an embarrassed party and egg on her face she makes a desperate U-turn.
While the majority of the public are facing another year of frozen pay - with no promise of increase, others have suffered redundancy (not least the council employees who's redundancies have funded these wonderful expense rises) - while being hammered by the increasing cost of living - the autocrat in her ivory tower thought it enough to issue a missive about how humanitarian she was being - accepting a pay rise for "those who come after her"
And STILL she claims only to be "giving back" as a measure to prevent detraction from "the good things" the council are doing. And stopping the protest is all about her beloved council - not her.
Humbug, Scott. Total humbug. It's all about the next election - retaining tenancy of your ivory tower and being able to accept that pretty little expense package during the NEXT term. I sincerely hope you're evicted.politepanda

1. "You must act solely in the public interest and should never improperly confer an advantage or disadvantage on any person or act to gain financial or other material benefits for yourself, your family, a friend or close associate"

2. "You must not place yourself under a financial or other obligation to outside individuals or organisations that might seek to influence you in the performance of your official duties"

4. "You are accountable for your decisions to the public and you must co-operate fully with whatever scrutiny is appropriate to your office"

7. "You must, when using or authorising the use of others of the resources of your authority, ensure that such resources are not used for political purposes (including party political purposes)"

It is worth noting that seemingly, the Code of Conduct is being "discussed" at the moment !!??......

Extract from Wiltshire Council Members Code of Conduct:
1. "You must act solely in the public interest and should never improperly confer an advantage or disadvantage on any person or act to gain financial or other material benefits for yourself, your family, a friend or close associate"
2. "You must not place yourself under a financial or other obligation to outside individuals or organisations that might seek to influence you in the performance of your official duties"
4. "You are accountable for your decisions to the public and you must co-operate fully with whatever scrutiny is appropriate to your office"
7. "You must, when using or authorising the use of others of the resources of your authority, ensure that such resources are not used for political purposes (including party political purposes)"
It is worth noting that seemingly, the Code of Conduct is being "discussed" at the moment !!??......brasstacks

ps...Jane Scott and her Cabinets "intention" to cut Youth Club Funding to the tune of "£500,000" is NOT an acceptable way to cover the costs of their excessive spending and waste of tax payers money..

ps...Jane Scott and her Cabinets "intention" to cut Youth Club Funding to the tune of "£500,000" is NOT an acceptable way to cover the costs of their excessive spending and waste of tax payers money..brasstacks

I am still waiting to hear how Dyson is going to establish a larger R&D dept. than British Aerospace on green belt land in Malmesbury.
This whole nonsense and his promise of a further 700 jobs seems to have disappeared from view.

I am still waiting to hear how Dyson is going to establish a larger R&D dept. than British Aerospace on green belt land in Malmesbury.
This whole nonsense and his promise of a further 700 jobs seems to have disappeared from view.kimcrawley

The Leader of Wiltshire Council giving up her increases only confuses the issue.

What will the rest of the Cabinet be doing?

Now we hear that the Youth Sevice in Wiltshire is to be hacked to death. Perhaps that is why the Leader gave up her money.

The meeting on Tuesday 4th February is going ahead. I wonder if we will find out the truth.

The Leader of Wiltshire Council giving up her increases only confuses the issue.
What will the rest of the Cabinet be doing?
Now we hear that the Youth Sevice in Wiltshire is to be hacked to death. Perhaps that is why the Leader gave up her money.
The meeting on Tuesday 4th February is going ahead. I wonder if we will find out the truth.brandx

kimcrawley wrote:
I am still waiting to hear how Dyson is going to establish a larger R&amp;D dept. than British Aerospace on green belt land in Malmesbury.
This whole nonsense and his promise of a further 700 jobs seems to have disappeared from view.

Yes - threw his toys out of the pram in Chippenham on a similar theme - wonder where he's brokered a cheaper deal this time?

[quote][p][bold]kimcrawley[/bold] wrote:
I am still waiting to hear how Dyson is going to establish a larger R&D dept. than British Aerospace on green belt land in Malmesbury.
This whole nonsense and his promise of a further 700 jobs seems to have disappeared from view.[/p][/quote]Yes - threw his toys out of the pram in Chippenham on a similar theme - wonder where he's brokered a cheaper deal this time?politepanda

...we....the people...have the right to 'moan' about whom ever or what ever we wish to moan about.....this is an example of freedom.....they...t
he public SERVANTS....are there because they CHOOSE to stand for the position.....and they need a sharp reminder that they are there for our interests...NOT their own interests.......

...we....the people...have the right to 'moan' about whom ever or what ever we wish to moan about.....this is an example of freedom.....they...t
he public SERVANTS....are there because they CHOOSE to stand for the position.....and they need a sharp reminder that they are there for our interests...NOT their own interests.......daryl1957

It's not uncommon for councillors to aspire to climb the political ladder and become MP's.

Now although I'm reasonably intelligent I have struggled to understand how these MP's could make such idiotic gaffes like the expenses fiddles and private-life scandals.

I'm grateful to our local council leader for illustrating to me how these elected representatives can be totally incapable of seeing the consequences of their actions. More worrying is the obvious character flaw that is bound to affect their business judgement too.

It's not uncommon for councillors to aspire to climb the political ladder and become MP's.
Now although I'm reasonably intelligent I have struggled to understand how these MP's could make such idiotic gaffes like the expenses fiddles and private-life scandals.
I'm grateful to our local council leader for illustrating to me how these elected representatives can be totally incapable of seeing the consequences of their actions. More worrying is the obvious character flaw that is bound to affect their business judgement too.nesspah

Have I got this right ? She was still saying publicly that she would take the increase until about a week ago; the Gazette, by means of a Freedom of Information enquiry discovered that she had decided NOT to take it over a month ago . . . ?

If this is so, the woman is being deceitful.

The pressure from Eric Pickles was made public, but I wrote to my MP(C.Perry) a month or so ago, and whilst I got a reply containing the usual guff about what a good job the Conservative council was doing, there was no doubt that Mrs Perry found the actions of Jane Scott to be "unhelpful."

It doesn't take the brains of an archbishop that Jane Scott's attitude to protests by the people she is supposed to represent and serve was "Get Stuffed!", and that she has only backed down in the face of pressure from her political masters.

She should go. Apart from her insensitivity and duplicity she is 67 years old, and looks like she is past it. Her statements that she was taking the allowances to protect the position of future council leaders (how we all believed that !) might just be true; she may have decided to take the flak prior to a planned resignation( which she also hasn't told us about) so that her successor will avoid having to deal with the public outrage at taking a pay rise. ("Pay" is what it effectively is - to refer to it as "allowances" is flummery.)

I'm certainly worried about the quality of some UKIP candidates in all upcoming elections, but the time has come for me, personally, to give my vote to them.

Have I got this right ? She was still saying publicly that she would take the increase until about a week ago; the Gazette, by means of a Freedom of Information enquiry discovered that she had decided NOT to take it over a month ago . . . ?
If this is so, the woman is being deceitful.
The pressure from Eric Pickles was made public, but I wrote to my MP(C.Perry) a month or so ago, and whilst I got a reply containing the usual guff about what a good job the Conservative council was doing, there was no doubt that Mrs Perry found the actions of Jane Scott to be "unhelpful."
It doesn't take the brains of an archbishop that Jane Scott's attitude to protests by the people she is supposed to represent and serve was "Get Stuffed!", and that she has only backed down in the face of pressure from her political masters.
She should go. Apart from her insensitivity and duplicity she is 67 years old, and looks like she is past it. Her statements that she was taking the allowances to protect the position of future council leaders (how we all believed that !) might just be true; she may have decided to take the flak prior to a planned resignation( which she also hasn't told us about) so that her successor will avoid having to deal with the public outrage at taking a pay rise. ("Pay" is what it effectively is - to refer to it as "allowances" is flummery.)
I'm certainly worried about the quality of some UKIP candidates in all upcoming elections, but the time has come for me, personally, to give my vote to them.e coli

You have missed the point e coli, it is not pay, if she wanted to be paid for acting as a Chief Executive then she should apply for the job - not make the position redundant and then claim she is doing so much 'work'.
It is not a 'job' being democratically elected to represent people.
What she and the other members of her cabinet have done is a tawdry fraud to line their own pockets. Not one of them is qualified or competent to make the decisions that they have made, they clearly lack the ability to provide all of the people in this county with the best use of resources.
Simple and total corruption. And as for UKIP if you think Scott was bad you wait and see what the 'swivel eyed looneys' come up with. Just like the tories they are fond of lining their own pockets.

You have missed the point e coli, it is not pay, if she wanted to be paid for acting as a Chief Executive then she should apply for the job - not make the position redundant and then claim she is doing so much 'work'.
It is not a 'job' being democratically elected to represent people.
What she and the other members of her cabinet have done is a tawdry fraud to line their own pockets. Not one of them is qualified or competent to make the decisions that they have made, they clearly lack the ability to provide all of the people in this county with the best use of resources.
Simple and total corruption. And as for UKIP if you think Scott was bad you wait and see what the 'swivel eyed looneys' come up with. Just like the tories they are fond of lining their own pockets.kimcrawley